Untitled

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume VI, Issue 266, 29 August 1895, Page 8

“ Tousles mediants sont buveurs de Teau, cest Hen prouve par le delugeff or to translate for the benefit of our non French-speaking readers—

Who are the wicked ? why water drinkers; The deluge proves it to all right thinkers. The French satirist who wrote this couplet years ago little thought at the time how applicable it would be to the present state of affairs in New Zealand. “ Who are the wicked ? why, water drinkers,” fits the present situation as light fits the eye, and we make the remark advisedly. Who are the people who in pursuance of a fanatical fad are willing to deprive the colony of a good twenty-five per cent of its revenue?— water drinkers. Who are the people who are willing, nay desirous of paralysing one of the great industries of a young colony, of increasing the ranks of the unemployed, of depreciating the value of property, of opening the gates for the introduction of new and as yet unknown criminal practices, of sending many a reputable and respectable’ citizen from comparative affluence into the barren regions of poveity ? Why, water drinkers, of course Men who, destitute

•of even a conception of liberty or free take the intolerant stand that was taken by those in power during the middle ages, and say in? effect, “ believe and act as my or you will bring yourself within the pale of the law,, which we will see is carried out? to its fullest 1 extent against you ” We have heard a lot'about 7 the; “ unspeakable Turk,” but we hardly expected tp find his principles carried out th such an oxtent ih a dvilised colony in the nineteenth century, and the exponents of these principles to be professed Christian ministers■ and modern legal* luminaries. Yet. such is the fact. When Othman, the great. Sultan, marched through the country with a sword in. one hand and the. Koran in.tbe other, .giving; the conquOred.their choice of embracing, the* tenetaof theone or feeling the edge of I the other he did? exactly the same as is* being.doneby t he Prohibition Party in i New Zealand centuries 1 la/tfet? As ai a matter of fact he was really the more: admirable‘of the two, fora#-least he acted on principle and not. because, the conversion or non-conversion of a : Giaouri put-a maravedi-in his pocket or lost: him on©; Oiur (another anala-gons-point between them and-the Turk) i

make a trade or profession of their principles, and apart from the pleasure it may give them to aid in stifling the liberties of their fellow men, derive pecuniary profit from the game. If it givesa man pleasure to practice an ascetic life, well and good, let him do it; but it is no reason that because it gratifies his conscience to make himself miserable he should band with fellow fanatics to impose the same restrictions that govern his mode of life upon other people. What an uproar there would be if a society with sufficient strength and controlling, the requisite number of votes were to pass a law making it compulsory for'etery avowed water drinker to drink two glasses of whiskey before breakfast, under pain of being fined for each breach of the law, what cries about tyranny, dahgerto health, and interference with person# liberty we should, hear ; and yet the prepositions of the Prohibitionists are eqpdly arbitrary. Many men, from their stale of health, find it absolutely necessarj to resort to stimulants l to . enable than to- fulfil their daily duties. Absolute prohibition would incapacitate them and perhaps l deprive the public- at large‘of "th? services of useful and necessary serants. MHny a physician has

found it necesary to resort to alcoholic remedies to save the life of a patient, and yet our friends the water drinkers would manacle his hands and render him helpless in many a case through imposing their fads on the public. All this we know, for reason teaches it to us. Mbre, we feel it instinctively, and yet what are we doing to prevent the coming into existence of a series of laws that will destroy independence of opinion and make us mere inmates of a huge colonial asylum, with Ministers as warders and petty judicial officials, having the power and will to direct our domestic life, and tell us (and enforce their decisions, too) how We shall eat, drink, and conduct ourselves ? Again we ask, what is being done to prevent such a consummation ? Prompt action is not only desirable but eminently necessary. The liquor traffic includes in its various ramifications men of all degrees; and influence, and unless some determined organisation is agreed upon and carried oiit, defeat must ensue. jPetty jealousies must be dropped, local /issues put aside, and a combination -formed’that will, by its strength and influence, weigh down the scales of public opinion in favour of free action for every free naan. Hesitation at the present

critical time means defeat and loss, continued apathy means absolute ruin. Why then sit in idleness ? Why adopt as a: motto- laissez faire ? Action, prompt action, aggressive action, is absolutely necessary. We are not exaggerating, we are stating plain facts, and facts that should and do demand attention. The Review is, as we have said before; no alarmist; but as a' guardian of public rights and interests it demands a hearing/